article thumbnail

Innovating the Term ‘Inventor’: AI and Patent Law

IPilogue

Recently, AI technology once again exceeded the legal community’s expectations by filing a patent for its invention of interlocking food containers. Under patent law, it is the general expectation that inventors are humans, not robots. Patent Law in Canada. 2002 SCC 77 (“Apotex”).

Inventor 106
article thumbnail

Patenting Biotech Invention

Biswajit Sarkar Copyright Blog

What is invented through biotechnological processes must be protected through patent protection lest a third person misuses the same. This came after careful observation of rising international trends with respect to innovations and inventions concerning biotechnology.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Australia’s Reversal of its DABUS decision on AI-Generated Inventions: How Does this Impact an Imminent Canadian Discussion on AI Inventorship?

IPilogue

Thaler’s application for his AI, DABUS, to be the patent owner of an invention titled “ Food container and devices and methods for attracting enhanced attention ,” a product solely created by DABUS without any human interference. What Does This Mean in the Canadian Context? In Apotex Inc v Wellcome Foundation.,

Invention 111
article thumbnail

Protection of Computer-Related Inventions : An Indian Perspective

Intepat

INTRODUCTION As technology continues to evolve at an unprecedented pace, Computer-Related Inventions (CRIs) have become a crucial component of modern innovation. The Patents Act, 1970, provides for the protection of CRIs, but there has been significant debate over the years regarding the patentability of such inventions in India.

article thumbnail

Supreme Court on Patent Law: November 2023

Patently-O

by Dennis Crouch The Supreme Court is set to consider several significant patent law petitions addressing a range of issues from the application of obviousness standards, challenges to PTAB procedures, interpretation of joinder time limits IPR, to the proper scope patent eligibility doctrine. Orlando Ventura , 537 U.S.

article thumbnail

Decoding The Scepticism Of Overlap Between Patents Law And Competition Law

IP and Legal Filings

In the fast growing economy, innovation is necessary for businesses and Patents as an intellectual property rights protects that innovation. Intellectual property rights provide a negative right in other words a monopoly right to the creator or Inventor over their creation or Invention. 7] Section 140 of The Patents Act, 1970. [8]

article thumbnail

Parliamentary Standing Committee Report on IPR: Tipping the Scales of Patent Law? Part I

SpicyIP

In this 2-part post, in part I, I will be analyzing the suggested amendments to Section 3 of the Patents Act (the substantial provisions) and part II will cover the suggested amendments to some of the procedural provisions of the Act. Section 3 of the Patents Act creates a list of restrictions on what inventions are not patentable.

Reporting 140